Posted on 04/10/2006 5:21:24 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
by Mark Finkelstein
April 10, 2006
Reminds me of the old joke: "The food at that restaurant is absolutely terrible."
"Yeah. And the portions are so small!"
This morning's 'Today' generally offered criticism of a potential attack on Iran designed to disable its nuclear program, but at the same time complained we didn't have the means to carry out such a strike.
UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw was shown stating that the idea of a [tactical] nuclear strike on Iran "is completely nuts." NBC correspondent Andrea Mitchell reported the skepticism of military experts who say "air strikes could slow Iran's nuclear research but not end it. And Iran could retaliate militarily against Israel and launch terrorists against the US."
'Today' then played a clip of military expert Michael O'Hanlon asking skeptically "what happens next? Do you wind up in a longer lower-intensity conflict with Iran after it takes steps to attack us? That kind of an escalation dynamic could be demanding on our troops."
Mitchell then flipped the coin, stating "but with US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, senior officials say they are reluctant to take on Iran. And, critics warn, the American people will not support another military engagement."
Even a certain French-looking junior Senator from the Bay State was shown, opining "there are many things we should do before we have exhausted the available avenues to us, and I think this military talk now is premature."
Interviewed by Katie Couric, Tim Russert stated "people I have talked to have said the war in Iraq is a major distraction, but they have to prepare for any eventuality. One of the biggest fears is that the current leadership in Iran, which is faced with a very strong reform movement and discontent within its own country, may find it in its interest to try to initiate something, to try to provoke something, a response from the United States, because that would unify the Iranians behind the existing theocracy."
That's when Katie had her damned-if-you-do-or-don't moment: "When it comes to planning for a possible military option, can the Bush administration afford to take this on? Obviously the military is stretched thin in Iraq and Afghanistan. From a PR point of view, do you think the American public is going to support this kind of planning even?"
Russert: "That's a huge question. And no less than John McCain said everything has to be on the table. But the idea of fighting two wars at once is obviously of grave concern to everybody."
"No less than John McCain"? Well, then, I guess the MSM has to take it seriously!
On a more serious note, the lack of balance in the Today report is surely due in part to NBC's various biases. Another factor, however, is that the report on the potential plans to attack Iran is the result of leaks. The administration is unwilling at this time even to acknowledge, much less specifically explain and defend, its planning As a result, you have a variety of 'experts' second-guessing matters without a counterweight from the administration. Thus the field is left open for a John Kerry to piously criticize the failure to exhaust other options, as if that's not exactly what the Bush administration is doing.
In any case, imagine a scenario in which Iran did launch a strike against the US or one of its allies. The same critics who today carp at the administration's itchy trigger finger would be condemning the lack of the very preparation that is apparently taking place.
Today Show/NewsBusters ping.
Odd how they get a new job and at the same time get so smart. From salads to nukes, we know it all.
It'll be too late after Iran launches against Israel, and they retaliate. Whatever and whenever it happens, it's going to get real ugly.
The Media Party is NOT helping this situation with Iran at all. In fact they seem to be trying to gin up another club to bash the President with.
Rather than help resolve a potential nightmare.
It's easy when you don't have a clue about either.
......... to Saddam and others.
;-)
When Katie moves to CBS, will you still be covering TODAY? I wonder how biased Meredith will be?! I wouldn't think she'd be as bad, but who knows!
"The Media Party is NOT helping this situation with Iran at all. In fact they seem to be trying to gin up another club to bash the President with."
- If past performance is any guide, look for another week of increasingly hysterical speculation in the MSM to be topped off by the inevitable NYT/CNN backed poll which will find that over 60% of the American public would not support any action against Iran and that it's all Bush's fault anyway.
The poll results will milk the story for another week of coverage.
Well, if the MSM is having kittens, bet the mullahs are, too :)
Astute people always keep ALL options on the table and regularly weigh the pros and cons of each. For Sy Hersch to latch on to this particular option and give it all the weight to the exclusion of other, assuredly more viable options, is journalistic malpractice.
Although I plan to check out Katie at her new gig, my plan is to remain on the Today show beat. The incredible thing is that, if anything, Viera is even MORE blatant in her liberal bias than Katie! Have a look:
http://newsbusters.org/node/4778
By coincidence, History Channel aired a show yesterday concerning the fall of the Shah & the emergence of Khomenei while he was in Paris. The show mentioned how Khomenei had hundreds of student volunteers who continually monitored the world-wide media/press and how it portrayed Khomenei. The students would gather the info for his review & how to play himself in a sympathetic view. History proves they learned well & they still know who their friends are in America.
Amazing. An unsubstantiated, unverified report by the MSM is debated as fact. On second thought, it is not so amazing.
Vice President Agnew, God bless him, was so right! We need him now. I wish there were someone within the administration today who would take on the press the way they deserve it.
BWAHAHAHA!!
What a great day for the LSM...a nincompoop interviewing a potato head. What's next? Perky interviewing Don Imus and Howard Stern on how they would handle the Hamas takeover of "Palastine"? Or maybe interviewing Sean Penn on the importance of stem-cell research on the future of grapefruits?
FMCDH(BITS)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.